We are "the Children of 9/11"

Peggy Noonan's article called “The Children of 9/11 Grow Up” is a well-written discussion of how the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 shaped the lives of those who were children at the time. She uses pathos beautifully and is very aware of her audience. This article, written for The Wall Street Journal, appeals to both college students and their older parents or grandparents, along with everyone in between.

First of all, Noonan captures those who were ten or twelve on 9/11 who are now college students. She describes this audience as being “old enough to understand that something dreadful had happened but young enough still to be in childhood” on 9/11 (par.2). This group of people, which includes myself, are drawn in by her early comments and the title. We are “the children of 9/11.” As Noonan describes the events of the day and quotes students she has talked to, we all find ourselves nodding our heads and remembering back to the “first moment of historical consciousness” in our lives (par.4). It happened just like she described it. People that were children back in 2001 will read it because they are interested to see what other people their age are saying. Noonan pulls readers in because she knows her audience would be interested to see her thoughts on how 9/11 affected them growing up.

However, Noonan is also interested in the readers her age. The people who can remember November 22, 1963 make up a large part of the readership of the Journal. She invites this audience to read as she draws parallels between JFK's assassination and the attacks of 9/11. The situtations were quite similar: the “hushed tones”, the teachers sobbing, the “shocked parents”, and how “everyone went home and watched TV all day, and the next” (par. 6). This article will help people understand how the events of 9/11 largely affected the children at the time.

By paying attention to her multiple audiences, Peggy Noonan is able to reach out to her readers. She captures their attention and intrigues them. Throughout the article, she remembers her intended audience and realizes what do they already know. Noonan wrote this to be inclusive and to reach all potential readers

Noonan, Peggy. "The Children of 9/11 Grow Up." Wall Street Journal (2009). The Wall Street Journal.

12 Sept. 2009. Web. 13 Oct. 2009. .

Stale Beer: A Not-So-Sober Crowd

As a citizen from Bountiful, Utah, I frequently read the local newspaper, "The Davis County Clipper." Over the summer, when JoAnn Hamilton reintroduced the liquor law issue in an attempt to campaign against Mayor Joe Johnson, I became extremely interested: I was raised in the neighborhood of both Mayor Joe and Sister Hamilton. As a member of the audience to whom JoAnn Hamilton wrote, I am now a better educated community member; through studying rhetorical techniques I have been able to recognize the manner in which argumentation and persuasion has a personal effect on my life.

First and foremost, it is clear to whom JoAnn Hamilton was writing: a nearly homogeneous, LDS, family-oriented population. Throughout her letter to the editor, Hamilton repeatedly refers to a "child-appropriate resolution," or "an ordinance to protect children" (par. 2, 3). Appealing to the majority of her audience, as was mentioned in a previous blog post on pathos, Hamilton creates a situation in which those who don't agree with her suddenly become in the wrong: i.e. if you don't agree with me, then you must not want to protect children. In this manner, many people, convinced that the mention of the words "beer" and "children" in the same sentence is the recipe for juvenile delinquents, sided with Hamilton at the time of the liquor law issue.

The question arises, however, concerning about the "other" members of Hamilton's audience. What was their response? The answer is found in her biased reporting of their actions against her: they threw beer cans all over her lawn after she complained about them (par. 13). Seemingly, because of Hamilton's presentation of her opinion, a lack of tolerance became evident in members of both parties. Though I do not drink beer, I know people who do. It is understandable to me, therefore, as to why the mayor supported the interests of the minority of Hamilton's audience. By having an attitude of tolerance, Mayor Johnson gained the support of many community members, both those who do and do not consume alcoholic beverages.

With that said, the liquor law ruckus occurred over two years ago. In reviving the issue, Hamilton seemed to expect that her audience of LDS, child-protecting citizens, would once again agree with her; however, in reading responses to her recent letter to the editor, Hamilton's audience seems to have changed. Because both Hamilton and Mayor Johnson are members of my neighborhood, I have been able to see on a personal level the way a mostly homogeneous community can be polarized on an issue. For example, children of both Johnson and Hamilton joined the fray, as well as other neighbors. Even Sheryl Allen, a representative for the Utah State Legislature, expressed her opinion concerning Hamilton's letter. Near the time of the primary election, it was interesting to see who had the campaign signs lining the lawns in support of Mayor Joe versus those with signs for Jeff Novak. I was able to both see and hear different responses and opinions expressed by numerous people whom I look up to and respect. In this manner, I had a personal application for audience analysis. It became obvious to me that an audience, no matter how similar their background, will always having varying responses to an argument.

Though several months after the publication of Hamilton's letter, there are still several weeks until the mayoral election. Interestingly, Mayor Joe leads the polls, indicating a clear and decisive victory. Hamilton, in censuring Johnson, seems to have given him the election by eliciting support from a variety of citizens, including those who once supported her stance on the liquor law issue. Thus, in addressing an audience, a number of factors become important in attempting to create an effective and persuasive argument. As is seen with JoAnn Hamilton's letter to the editor, one must be careful: an audience may react differently than expected as a result of the presentation of an issue.

Beauty for All

It is highly unlikely that one has watched television or read a magazine without seeing a Proactiv Solution advertisement. Their commercials have become so popular due to their promised guarantee, that they are virtually everywhere.

I did not really notice that ProActiv focuses primarily on Caucasians until I read Ben's analysis. Most, if not all of the women and men on their website, commercials and magazine articles are Caucasias. It is true that 'the average white does have a higher income than African-Americans or Hispanics.' (par.3) This is so proved in an article called "Race and Income", which states that, "White incomes have risen a bit, on average, while incomes for black and Hispanic families have declined." (par.2) So, by appealing to the more wealthy, they hope to draw in more money. It is unclear as to if the company is trying to say that white people are more beautiful than the other races or not. Some people may take offense to the fact that there are primarily whites on the advertisements and commercials. In looking up other articles I came across one that noted P. Diddy and the Williams sisters. That is the first time I have seen African Americans mentioned in a ProActiv advertisement. It is true that even though they hardly do it, when they do, they mention famous athletes and musical artists to draw in the crowd.

It is true that the site is primarily focused on women in their late teens and older. They have gotten gorgeous actresses, dancers and other Hollywood starts to promote their products. The Proactiv company has ingeniously used these not only attractive, but rich and famous, people to promote their products. Many women become tricked by this and think that if they use Proactiv, they too will become beautiful like the beautiful women who endorse it. These stars also always look precisely immaculate in the commercials, leading consumers to believe they will be happy and immaculate too with the use of these products. As silly as it sounds, it works. Most women are so concerned about their looks that they will do anything to become more beautiful than the next girl. These women will also usually go to any cost, however extreme, to make beauty happen for them. Proactiv can charge whatever they want because they target the female audience so well with their endorsers. It is an ingenious tactic and other companies should learn from their example.


Proactiv located their two main target consumers and used tactics to persuade and draw them in to purchasing their products. The company was obviously very smart in determining the audience they would show their products to. Being aware of the audience can help to make writing or advertisements more successful.

Touching Lives

A wonderful man who made a difference in the world is Martin Luther King, Jr. His famous speech “I have a dream” is widely known and referred to frequently. Before August 28, 1963, the date of his speech, the United States was greatly segregated. Black people were not treated equally, and white people were seen as better people who deserved everything. The country was racist. Something had to be done and King was the one to do it. He was courageous and bold and stood up for what he believed in. The most effective tactic he used during that speech was the audience he spoke to. With the correct audience, nearly anything can be achieved.

Martin Luther King, Jr. knew his audience. He knew who he was addressing and how to speak to them. On that day in August, over 200,000 civil rights supporters gathered to hear his message and act accordingly. The people in attendance, predominantly black, came because they were passionate about freedom and equal rights. Any speaker or author, like King, needs to recognize the beliefs of their audience, because this is the key in gaining their support and word. Martin states, “the Negro still is not free…the life of the Negro is still sadly crippled by the manacles of segregation and the chains of discrimination…the Negro lives on a lonely island of poverty in the midst of a vast ocean of material prosperity...the Negro is still languished in the corners of American society and finds himself an exile in his own land. And so we've come here today to dramatize a shameful condition” (par.3). With this, he stirs the emotions of people, using pathos, and creates an image for all to recognize and relate to. Martin Luther King knew his audience and what they had been through.

Another important factor in touching those you are speaking to is by relating to them and understanding their circumstances. King knew exactly what the people were challenged with because he faced the same problem. He understood the feeling of segregation and being hated just because of the color of your skin. He could empathize with the people. Therefore, his argument becomes even more effective.

The crowd was filled with those who could relate, mainly black people, but white people still were in attendance, as many supported his beliefs as well. King showed his respect for all people. He reiterates “that all men, yes, black men as well as white men, would be guaranteed the ‘unalienable Rights’ of ‘Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness’” (par.4). King relates black men to white men, proving that all are equal and are granted the same freedoms. He also shows that respect should be given, even to those who have not shown mercy on black men. He says, “Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred. We must forever conduct our struggle on the high plane of dignity and discipline. We must not allow our creative protest to degenerate into physical violence” (par.8). King exemplifies to the people that although times have been hard, all must act with poise and rationally. He knows how the people must feel and their animosity towards those repressing them, but he speaks calmly, explaining that irrational judgment is not going to bring about anything good. King knows what the people are thinking, and therefore is able to alleviate their concerns.

Lastly, the people needed a leader with confidence. They have gone through horrible times; times of slavery and unjust punishments. Martin Luther King exemplified a fearless leader who stood up for his beliefs. He truly expresses his love for the people as he proclaims, “when this happens, when we allow freedom ring, when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God's children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual:
Free at last! Free at last!
Thank God Almighty, we are free at last” (par. 32)!
Martin Luther King, Jr. made a difference in the world because he stood up for what he wanted and was able to touch the lives of many. He knew his audience and addressed them in the appropriate manner, which he knew would be most effective.